GeForce 210 vs Radeon RX 6900 XT

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 6900 XT and GeForce 210, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 6900 XT
2020
16 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
59.82
+21264%

RX 6900 XT outperforms 210 by a whopping 21264% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking281332
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation30.03no data
Power efficiency15.830.72
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameNavi 21GT218
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date28 October 2020 (4 years ago)12 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 $29.49

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores512016
Core clock speed1825 MHz589 MHz
Boost clock speed2250 MHzno data
Number of transistors26,800 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)300 Watt30.5 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate720.04.160
Floating-point processing power23.04 TFLOPS0.03936 TFLOPS
ROPs1284
TMUs3208
Ray Tracing Cores80no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm168 mm
Heightno data2.731" (6.9 cm)
Width3-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR6GDDR2
Maximum RAM amount16 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s8.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR+-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-CDVIVGADisplayPort
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.54.1
OpenGL4.63.1
OpenCL2.11.1
Vulkan1.2N/A
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RX 6900 XT 59.82
+21264%
GeForce 210 0.28

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RX 6900 XT 26729
+21631%
GeForce 210 123

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD1960−1
1440p1340−1
4K83-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.10no data
1440p7.46no data
4K12.04no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+31100%
1−2
−31100%
Cyberpunk 2077 160−170 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 140−150 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 195 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+31100%
1−2
−31100%
Cyberpunk 2077 160−170 0−1
Far Cry 5 170−180 0−1
Fortnite 300−350
+30100%
1−2
−30100%
Forza Horizon 4 283
+28200%
1−2
−28200%
Forza Horizon 5 180−190 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 140−150 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 350−400
+36100%
1−2
−36100%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 196 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+31100%
1−2
−31100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+27700%
1−2
−27700%
Cyberpunk 2077 160−170 0−1
Dota 2 160−170 0−1
Far Cry 5 170−180 0−1
Fortnite 300−350
+30100%
1−2
−30100%
Forza Horizon 4 279
+27800%
1−2
−27800%
Forza Horizon 5 180−190 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 160−170 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 140−150 0−1
Metro Exodus 164 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 323
+32200%
1−2
−32200%
Valorant 350−400
+36100%
1−2
−36100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 197 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 160−170 0−1
Dota 2 160−170 0−1
Far Cry 5 170−180 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 248
+24700%
1−2
−24700%
Hogwarts Legacy 140−150 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 164 0−1
Valorant 411
+41000%
1−2
−41000%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 300−350
+30100%
1−2
−30100%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 190−200 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 450−500
+24700%
2−3
−24700%
Grand Theft Auto V 130−140 0−1
Metro Exodus 102 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 400−450
+21900%
2−3
−21900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 196 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95 0−1
Far Cry 5 150−160 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 231
+23000%
1−2
−23000%
Hogwarts Legacy 80−85 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160 0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 85−90 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 150−160 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50 0−1
Metro Exodus 67 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 122 0−1
Valorant 300−350
+33000%
1−2
−33000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 134 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 85−90 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 0−1
Dota 2 150−160 0−1
Far Cry 5 100−110 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 162 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 59.82 0.28
Recency 28 October 2020 12 October 2009
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 7 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 300 Watt 30 Watt

RX 6900 XT has a 21264.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 210, on the other hand, has 900% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6900 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 210 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT
Radeon RX 6900 XT
NVIDIA GeForce 210
GeForce 210

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 3955 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6900 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 3764 votes

Rate GeForce 210 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 6900 XT or GeForce 210, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.